What is “evidence”? Every epistemologist (epistemology being the study of “how we know”) uses the word with great regularity, yet definitions or specific characteristics are difficult to come across. Evidentialism, that epistemological enterprise based on”evidence”, does not make the enterprise any clearer, using ambiguous terminology such as “quality” to determine the fittingness of evidence. How does one determine the quality of such evidence? By the explanatory power of the evidence? By some ineff able characteristic? Such a question does not have a solid answer, other than placing an “obligatory” status on “good” evidence.
Tag: John Locke
What is assent? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, it is to “agree to something especially after thoughtful consideration.”1 This doesn’t quite encapsulate what assent is, from a philosophical position. In general, to assent to an idea/belief, specifically, means to accept such an idea based on logical and rational reasoning – not simply “thinking hard”. Since, as it is probably clear to say, there is no way to completely, once and for all, prove something as a fact, assent is a constant factor in human life. Every day, human beings assent to certain beliefs without conscious knowledge through our various faculties. How does one explain such an odd phenomenon?
Philosophers and theologians have attempted to deal with this issue, especially in reference to religious beliefs. John Locke and John Henry Newman are the two most prominent philosophers who directly discussed “assent.” Each has a thorough examination of why persons accept certain beliefs, however logical or “illogical” these might appear. However, as befitting an empiricist like Locke and a cardinal like Newman, their definitions are dry and technical, depriving such decisions of their basic and integral humanity.The reduction of assent to a scientific formula reduces its meaning and complexity, rendering it an empty shell.